European Court of Human Rights

---

You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> CICCONE v. ITALY - 38043/97 [2002] ECHR 718 (7 November 2002)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2002/718.html
Cite as: [2002] ECHR 718

---

[New search] [Contents list] [Help]

---

FIRST SECTION

CASE OF CICCONE v. ITALY

(Application no. 38043/97)

JUDGMENT

(Friendly settlement)

STRASBOURG

7 November 2002

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Ciccone v. Italy,

The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:

Mr C.L. ROZAKIS, President,

Mr G. BONELLO,

Mr P. LORENZEN,

Mrs N. VAJIć,

Mrs S. BOTOUCHAROVA,

Mrs E. STEINER, judges,

Mrs M. DEL TUFO, ad hoc judge,

and Mr S. NIELSEN, Deputy Section Registrar,

Having deliberated in private on 17 October 2002,

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1.  The case originated in an application (no. 38043/97) against the Italian Republic lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights (“the Commission”) under former Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by an Italian national, Mrs Stefania Ciccone (“the applicant”), on 30 May 1997.

2.  The applicant was represented by MM. U. Flamini and A. Ierardi, lawyers practising in Rome. The Italian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr U. Leanza, and by their co-agent, Mr V. Esposito.

3.  The applicant complained about her prolonged inability – through lack of police assistance – to recover possession of her apartment and about the duration of the eviction proceedings.

4.  The case was transferred to the Court on 1 November 1998 by virtue of Article 5 § 2 of Protocol No. 11 to the Convention.

5.  On 4 October 2001, having obtained the parties’ observations, the Court declared the application admissible.

6.  On 4 July 2002 and on 10 July 2002, the applicant and the Agent of the Government respectively submitted formal declarations proposing a friendly settlement of the case.

THE FACTS

7.  Mr E.B. was the owner of an apartment in Rome, which he had let to F.G.

8.  In a writ served on the tenant on 24 July 1986, he communicated his intention to terminate the lease and summoned the tenant to appear before the Rome Magistrate.

9.  By a decision of 12 February 1987, which was made enforceable on the same day, the Rome Magistrate upheld the validity of the notice to quit and ordered that the premises be vacated by 30 November 1988.

10.  On 9 March 1990, Mr E.B. served notice on the tenant requiring her to vacate the premises. On 23 May 1990, he served notice on the tenant informing her that the order for possession would be enforced by a bailiff on 7 June 1990.

11.  Between 7 June 1990 and 30 April 1991, the bailiff made ten attempts to recover possession.

12.  On 14 May 1991, the applicant became the owner of the apartment.

13.  Between 28 May 1991 and 16 November 1994, the bailiff made thirty-three attempts to recover possession.

14.  On 1 December 1994, the applicant made a statutory declaration that she urgently required the premises as accommodation for herself.

15.  Between 26 January 1995 and 7 May 1997, the bailiff made eleven attempts to recover possession. Each attempt proved unsuccessful, as the applicant was never granted the assistance of the police in enforcing the order for possession.

16.  On 10 May 1997, the tenant vacated the premises.

THE LAW

17.  On 10 July 2002, the Court received the following declaration from the Government:

“I declare that the Government of Italy offer to pay 7,000 (seven thousand) Euros to Mrs Stefania Ciccone with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the application registered under no. 38043/97. This sum shall cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs, and it will be payable within three months starting from the notification of the judgment delivered by the Court pursuant to Article 39 of the European Convention on Human Rights. This payment will constitute the final resolution of the case.

This declaration does not entail any acknowledgement by the Government of a violation of the European Convention on Human Rights in the present case.

The Government further undertake not to request the referral of the case to the Grand Chamber under Article 43 § 1 of the Convention.”

18.  On 4 July 2002, the Court received from the applicant’s representatives the following declaration signed by the applicant and by the applicant’s representatives:

“We note that the Government of Italy are prepared to pay a sum totalling 7,000 (seven thousand) Euros covering both pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs to Mrs Stefania Ciccone with a view to securing a friendly settlement of application no. 38043/97 pending before the Court.

We accept the proposal and waive any further claims in respect of Italy relating to the facts of this application. We declare that the case is definitely settled.

This declaration is made in the context of a friendly settlement, which the Government and the applicant have reached.

We further undertake not to request the referral of the case to the Grand Chamber under Article 43 § 1 of the Convention after the delivery of the Court’s judgment.”

19.  The Court takes note of the agreement reached between the parties (Article 39 of the Convention). It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention or its Protocols (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention and Rule 62 § 3 of the Rules of Court).

20.  Accordingly, the case should be struck out of the list.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT UNANIMOUSLY

1.  Decides to strike the case out of the list;

2.  Takes note of the parties’ undertaking not to request a rehearing of the case before the Grand Chamber.

Done in English, and notified in writing on 7 November 2002, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

Søren Nielsen Christos ROZAKIS

Deputy Registrar President

---